But it kinda sucks tbh.
For me, it's pretty simple. I can want Apple to be better in a lot of ways while also thinking they have the legal right to operate as they do.
You're in the neighborhood but apple's rules can't themselves be illegal.I have no love for Apple. I don't buy their products and I don't use their system.
I think both are shitty.
But the way I see it, if you play in their court, you play by their rules.
If you don't want to play by their rules, then don't play with Apple full stop. I don't.
I feel that people say they want more open platform is a myth because when stuff comes out on stuff other then steam people bitch left and right so I don't understand why people always talk about this. Just mine personal thought
No clue never had issues with it
This company is ran by a literal manchild oh my god HAHAHAHAHA
Don't think it would be open though. It's just being forced to use something else. EGS has been just as much of a walled garden on PC because they buy so many games out - they would do the same on mobile.
mark zuckerberg, elon musk - it's a not all that uncommon phenomenon nowadays. &, hey, fell free to laugh all you want, because that's what they're all doing, as well. all the way to the bank...
Apple:
Epic:
They are talking about the same thing, so who got caught?
"On June 30, 2020, Epic's CEO Tim Sweeney wrote my colleagues and me an email asking for a 'side letter' from Apple that would create a special deal for only Epic that would fundamentally change the way in which Epic offers apps on Apple's iOS platform," former Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller wrote in a declaration. Schiller, whose title is now Fellow, runs Apple's App Store.
Apple said Sweeney was asking permission for Epic to bypass in-app purchases and allow Fortnite players to pay it directly. Schiller said that Sweeney emailed him the morning that Forntite changed its payment mechanism saying that it "will not longer adhere to Apple's payment processing restrictions."
The only people I've ever met who've had issues with Android are people who have never used it and then talk about how iOS is the best.
I imagine they've been long expecting a lawsuit over this from some entity, and have thoroughly prepared themselves for it. There's already government probes underway in the US and EU in this regard, so this fight with Epic is just the precursor.Reading Apple response and damn they digged every possible lawsuit they could to defend themselves. Like holy s*it amount of lawsuits.
You can say that, but that's essentially the behavior that Microsoft got litigated for(and lost an anti-trust suit over). Mobile devices with iOS and Android are now as ubiquitous as PCs are/were. The idea that Apple can have such control is not going to hold up long term. If we wouldn't accept it on a PC, it's probably not going to be accepted on mobile devices.I have no love for Apple. I don't buy their products and I don't use their system.
I think both are shitty.
But the way I see it, if you play in their court, you play buy their rules.
If you don't want to play by their rules, then don't play with Apple full stop. I don't.
Tim Sweeney tweeted several times that he didn't ask for a special deal. He did ask for a special deal. His 'hoping' that Apple will do the same for other devs was placed there in case Apple refused to play ball and this communication became public, as it ended up happening.
Of course I don't believe that Epic are only doing this for the good of everyone and not primarily their own bottom line. That's BS, even if Sweeney seems like someone who's pretty invested in the principle of opposing walled gardens.they were trying to cut themselves their own secret deal, contrary to what they were saying about "doing this for everyone"
people could smell the bullshit from a mile away. this is purely about making themselves another gatekeeper.
Epic said the purpose of their lawsuit was not to get a special deal...when there is evidence that they intitated the motions the triggered lawsuit because they got denied a special deal.He lied about asking for a deal, but there isn't an issue about asking for a deal. Lots of companies do this. No big deal. This doesn't hurt Epic's lawsuit.
I just find it really hard to see how he's honestly opposed to walled gardens when they're perfectly fine locking up exclusives for a year on their store. A more limited 'walled garden' but aren't they kinda the same thing even though it's not permanent?Of course I don't believe that Epic are only doing this for the good of everyone and not primarily their own bottom like. That's BS, even if Sweeney seems like someone who's pretty invested in the principle of opposing walled gardens.
I know he said he's not "asking for a special deal" like the one with Amazon as the outcome of this process, didn't know about the tweets saying he never "asked about one" before. Not a good look if that's true. I guess he will frame this as asking for a temporary change to their contract with Apple until they've changed the rules for everyone.
But his argument is that smartphones have taken the place of PCs in most people's lives and the old business model of one app store as the only place you can get software for billions of devices is monopolistic and too restrictive. Someone has to kick down the door and make things better for everyone in the process (like Netflix for "reader apps"), so why not Epic?
Jeff Gerstmann theorized this, that Epic would settle for a sweetheart deal.
Why would you go out on Twitter saying you're not seeking a special deal when you know damn well Apple has you saying you're indeed seeking that in an e-mail? How are you THAT stupid?!
Tim Sweeney tweeted several times that he didn't ask for a special deal. He did ask for a special deal. His 'hoping' that Apple will do the same for other devs was placed there in case Apple refused to play ball and this communication became public, as it ended up happening.
He's really clinging to that subtext to shield himself, isn't he? Nobody of sound mind believes for a second that he's doing this for other developers.
Ok... that doesn't hurt the merits of the case.Epic said the purpose of their lawsuit was not to get a special deal...when there is evidence that they intitated the motions the triggered lawsuit because they got denied a special deal.
Yeah that's kinda the same thing I was thinking but couldn't really put it into words. I mean, it's a quick throw in for him to say it when it's very apparent the meat of what he's talking about is his store.That is a weakass justification for that entire negotiation tactic.
It's not like that sentence has any legal or leveraging power, he could have easily said "I hope you send a box of blueberry waffles to all registered iOS devs as a token of good faith" and it would be equally as relevant to the discussion.
Bingo, its an offical written requests vs a feel good 'i hope you do this out of the goodness of your heart'That is a weakass justification for that entire negotiation tactic.
It's not like that sentence has any legal or leveraging power, he could have easily said "I hope you send a box of blueberry waffles to all registered iOS devs as a token of good faith" and it would be equally as relevant to the discussion.
uuhh that's normal. All the big companies do this and some even manage to be successful by holding enough leverage.
Do this thing for me or I sue, you can maybe throw a bone to those folks over there if you want.Exactly. He requests Apple allow EGS on iOS and follows up by only hoping they will provide the same for others. If Sweeney is really fighting for the little guy and acting on altruism then there shouldn't be two distinguished statements there -- just one requesting Apple open up to everyone.
It does, because it's direct evidence against Epic's claimed reasons for the lawsuit in the first place.
But it's a deal for EVERYONE. not just Epic. So it's mootIt does, because it's direct evidence against Epic's claimed reasons for the lawsuit in the first place.
...no its not. Its a deal so they can get onto the App store with their own Store with zero fees to Apple, but forcing Apple to let them onto the iOS, the equivlence of saying Steam should host the EGS.
I don't think you're reading the same thing I am. How so?
Its a deal for Epic, and if somebody else gets something, thats cool.
It's called the Epic Deal, not the public deal.
yeah I have been on Android for a long time now. iOS was definitely too restrictive for me. Android isn't as open as I'd like though, still think Google and the Play Store is a little too dominant. They seem to be taking back the reigns inch by inch. At least there is Samsung out there I guess.Android is pretty open. People that want to have more open stuff go that route. You go to apple for their closed ecosystem.
idk, I just don't like platforms as large as iOS and Android having any kind of restrictions. They should be a completely open platform in terms of app distribution. Those computing platforms are far too important to be closed off.For me, it's pretty simple. I can want Apple to be better in a lot of ways while also thinking they have the legal right to operate as they do.
yeah I think people just want stuff to come to their preferred platform, and with PC Gaming it's usually Steam.I feel that people say they want more open platform is a myth because when stuff comes out on stuff other then steam people bitch left and right so I don't understand why people always talk about this. Just mine personal thought
well when I talk about platforms, I am talking about the OS. Windows is an open platform in terms of that you don't have to have anyone's permission to put something on there. So you have a open and competitive marketplace. Customers can choose to shop wherever, as well as devs.Don't think it would be open though. It's just being forced to use something else. EGS has been just as much of a walled garden on PC because they buy so many games out - they would do the same on mobile.
In the past, he criticized MS for trying to turn the PC software market into a less open space, more similar to smartphones. So I think there's more than just profit on is mind, even if it's probably the main motivator.I just find it really hard to see how he's honestly opposed to walled gardens when they're perfectly fine locking up exclusives for a year on their store. A more limited 'walled garden' but aren't they kinda the same thing even though it's not permanent?